_{Thumbnail photo: Fred Haight Drive near Rainbow Lane. | Photo courtesy of Michelle Carrillo}

Despite learning that they wouldn’t be able to make a reduced speed limit on Fred Haight Drive stick if it was challenged in court, Del Norte County supervisors directed staff to take other measures to slow down traffic.

District 3 Supervisor Chris Howard, whose constituency lives on the major collector road that serves Smith River, told county staff Tuesday that he wanted to challenge the California Vehicle Code’s definition of what a residential zone looks like.

“We really need some direction to you about where we need to attack it specific to the direction of a driveway,” Howard told County Engineer Jon Olson, referring to the Vehicle Code’s stipulation that a residential zone has either 13 homes on one side of the road or 16 homes on either side of the road with driveways that face the road.

“It’s insanity. We need to know how we can get this changed in the code so we can impact the speed,” Howard said. He pointed out that when Caltrans starts work on U.S. 101 at Rowdy Creek in about six months people will use Fred Haight Drive to try to “race the stop light.”

Conducting a study “in which we could affect the vehicle code” was one of the items the Board approved to get motorists to slow down on Fred Haight. 

Olson, who delivered the unwelcome results of an engineering and traffic survey conducted last month, recommended challenging the Vehicle Code definition of a local road, which allows the county to “set any speed limit we want.

County supervisors could petition state lawmakers to expand that definition to include minor collector roads and major collector roads, Olson said.

The Board also approved Howard’s motion to assess whether a stop sign could be placed at Fred Haight Drive and Wilson Lane — about 1,300 feet south of where the speed limit changes from 25 mph to 45 mph — and to determine whether a graduated speed limit could be implemented between the 25 mph zone and 45 mph zone.

Howard also urged Engineering and Road Division staff to move the speed limit signs “closer to the point of impact where they should have been traditionally placed.”

Currently Fred Haight’s posted speed limit ranges from 25 mph to 50 mph. Noting in his report that speed limits in California are generally set based on the 85th percentile speed rounded to the nearest 5 mph increment, Olson recommended against lowering the speed limits on Fred Haight Drive.

According to Olson’s staff report, if the county were to go by the 85th percentile rule — which is the speed at or below which 85% of people drive under “free-flowing conditions” — it would justify increasing the speed limit on some parts of the road from 50 mph to 55 mph. 

The 85th percentile rule would also justify increasing the speed limit on Fred Haight Drive about 1,300 feet north and south of Wilson Lane from 45 mph to 55 mph going north and from 45 mph to 50 mph for traffic going south, according to Olson’s report.

During an Oct. 13, 2026 speed study conducted near Wilson Lane, about 85% of northbound traffic were traveling at speeds of 53 mph, while southbound traffic was traveling at 52 mph.

Olson also cited the Transportation Injury Mapping System tool available through the University of California, Berkeley, which showed that between January 2020 and June 2026, there was only one collision on Fred Haight Drive about 1,300 feet north and south of Wilson Lane. One car drove off the road and hit a fixed object, Olson told supervisors.

“The recommendation is to leave that (speed limit) at 45 mph and for the southern end to leave that in place too,” Olson told supervisors, adding that they could put any speed limit sign they wanted to on that stretch of road, but they would be unenforceable. “It doesn’t stop the sheriff or CHP from writing tickets. It only stops when somebody challenges that ticket in court and says, ‘Show me your study that you justify that speed limit.’”

During public comment, Michelle Carrillo, the Fred Haight Drive resident who brought her concerns to the Board after a speeding car struck and killed her family’s livestock guardian dog, focused on the county’s speed study. 

“Your own speed study clocked a driver at 81 mph on Fred Haight just in the one time they measured it,” she said. “We live that every day. Our neighborhood group chat on Facebook constantly has people talking about that speed every day, let alone when the construction is going on at the bridge. People like to try to use Fred Haight as that short cut.”

Carrillo called Fred Haight a death trap with no shoulders and open ditches. According to her, a neighbor told her that her daughter was nearly struck by a car because they refused to wait for the school bus. 

Carrillo also disputed Vehicle Code’s definition of a residential zone, saying that regardless of how the doors are situated in relation to the road, there are still 16 homes as well as driveways and businesses in the area. She asked supervisors to consider expanding the 25 mph zone to Wilson Lane, which is where those homes are.

“We need to post warning signs for kids and cyclists,” she said. “We don’t need another study to tell us what we live every day.”

Brie Fraley, whose mother lives on Fred Haight Drive, urged Del Norte County supervisors to submit a resolution to state lawmakers lobbying for more local control when it comes to setting speed limits on county roads. She also urged them to reach out to their counterparts in Siskiyou, Modoc and Shasta counties.

Olson, who suggested posting recommended speed signs on Fred Haight Drive, which can calm traffic but aren’t regulatory, said the county could also expand the 25 mph zone. Transitioning between speed limits using a step-down approach is also reasonable, he said.

“I think there’s language in the existing code to allow for us to do that without changing our code,” he said. “You’re not changing a speed limit, we’re just modifying where our signs are and how we’re going from 45 mph to 25 mph. I feel comfortable with that.”

District 2 Supervisor Valerie Starkey asked Olson to return to the Board in about 90 days to see if the changes made an impact. However, Olson asked to return in about six months with any results.